Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infosnacking

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. Rjd0060 (talk) 14:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infosnacking

This is basically a dictionary definition for a word. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Tavix (talk) 00:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete belongs in a dictionary as far as I can tell... nearly all published mentions of the term just cover its addition to Webster's (and note that only 5 of those results are unique stories). --Rividian (talk) 00:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bag it. I'd normally consider Word of the Year to be a big step on the way to notability, but this one just seems like an unfulfilling quickie mart flavor of the week that sounded tasty but had no staying power. --Dhartung | Talk 00:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Coverage in a couple reliable sources aside, as even the editors of the dictionary admit, it's not notable or widely-used. I don't believe a word with a minor award (note that this is Webster's Collegiate dictionary Word of the Year) that didn't even get it into the dictionary is worthy of inclusion.--Michael White^T·C 01:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and other recommendations above. I'm not even convinced that this word would even warrant coverage in Wiktionary. It certainly has not caught on in the media in the two years since it was declared "word of the year", and that award was mostly because it amused the awardgivers and not because anybody was actually using it. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting point... use of this term seems to have died after Winter 2005/06, the last use I see is in February 2006 then nothing. Even on Usenet the last use is January 2006. This seems to be a fad word that didn't catch on at all. --Rividian (talk) 17:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NAD. It's a non-notable dictionary definition. — Wenli ^{(reply here)} 21:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.